Re: [racket-users] Re: Request for Feedback (SQL, Plisqin)

2019-06-22 Thread Ben Greenman
I don't know if I understood the "Aggregates are self-contained" section. The SQL looks self-contained, as long as you read the whole query. And one has to read the whole query in the Plisquin version too (but definitions come first). In the last section, I'm not sure what a "scalar" or "plural

[racket-users] Re: Request for Feedback (SQL, Plisqin)

2019-06-21 Thread Ryan Kramer
Thanks Alex, that was very helpful. > it is not clear from the document how any of it can be useful. > I got this same feedback from some friends on the 0.1 release. Also, it is not clear > what `Department?` and `Course?` are in the first code snippet -- are they > functions that the user

[racket-users] Re: Request for Feedback (SQL, Plisqin)

2019-06-21 Thread Alex Harsanyi
While I am familiar with SQL, I am not familiar with any of the libraries you mention on the wiki page (Ecto, Honey SQL and Slick), so maybe I am not the target audience... Your sections about "Joins Are Values" and "Aggregates are self-contained" seem difficult to follow: I think I understand

[racket-users] Re: Request for Feedback (SQL, Plisqin)

2019-06-21 Thread Ryan Kramer
Oops, I got the link wrong: https://github.com/default-kramer/plisqin/wiki/Towards-Better-Relational-Query-Languages On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 11:41:31 AM UTC-5, Ryan Kramer wrote: > > Target Audience: you have 10 minutes and you're familiar with libraries > that do SQL kinda like this: > >